Thursday, 20 February 2014

Have you ever heard of Jose Manuel Barrosa? I didn’t think you had! Burt don’t worry about it, the overwhelming majority of people in the world haven’t either; so you’re in excellent company on that score. So why am I mentioning him or even bothering to write about this detritus of humanity that even in his home country of Portugal is a phenomenal nonentity? Well Jose belongs to that group of prime idiots and thoroughbred jobsworths with nothing special about them except their endemic sycophancy and the primitive yearning to at all times unquestioningly do the bidding of those who are pulling their chains; individuals with not a single original or innovative thought in their heads. The sort of individuals who quite incredibly, from the perspective of any logical and intelligent person, find themselves at the top of corporations and quangos, and in Jose’s case the European Union where he’s, would you credit it, the President of that entity.

Unelected of course, as no sensible person if the post was an elected one would vote for him; but he’s not alone in that regard as none of those who are routinely and inexplicably parachuted into the top echelon of that body calling itself the EU Commission is ever elected. Yet they have the sheer audacity and the mindboggling temerity to deign to speak for the rest of us, when to start with the us who comprise the majority of citizens of the EU haven’t a bloody idea who these people are or why they’re there in the first place; neither have they any mandate, in the remotest sense of that word, to speak for us or on our behalf. That though doesn’t stop them from arrogating to themselves the unilateral right to do so; and thoroughbred jerk Jose is a past master in that regard. The loquacious berk that one can’t shut up because he’s so enamoured with the sound of his own voice.

So why am I having a go at this Iberian Dego and covert fascist from Portugal whose country with a discernible and transparent penchant for dictatorship along with the likes of its likeminded brethren in Spain and Greece were purposely allowed into the EU in the inflated hope of stemming their intuitive bad behaviour? It’s all to do with remarks that Jose asininely and quite deliberately, dishonestly and lyingly made at the weekend, 15-16 February 2014, about the ineligibility of an independent Scotland being permitted to remain, for realistically and truthfully that’s precisely what the correct and legal position is as Scotland as things stand is currently and has been for the last 40 years been a member of the EU albeit within the framework of the United Kingdom, although jackass Jose falsely tried to give the impression that Scotland has never been a part of that EU and therefore like any state not previously in that body but venturing to become a member would have to take pot luck through the accession process. How bloody evil, disingenuous and lying can one get?

He then went on to say that political entities that break away from a sovereign and independent state which is already a part of the EU, even if this process of severance was consummately democratic and above board, don’t essentially have a snowflake in Hell’s chance of rejoining the EU. Has this prized prat Jose never heard of Czechoslovakia? Well I have; and I’m absolutely certain that millions of people within the EU alone knew of this sovereign and independent country that was a member of the European Union, an instant recognition on Czechoslovakia’s part which is more than can be said for this pupped up and runt-like fart Jose Barroso. However it split into the two separate entities of Slovakia and the Czech Republic that we currently have, and the interesting thing about this split is that it was something that the vast majority of Czechoslovakians didn’t want, in marked contrast to what the political elite that ran the country aided and abetted by their foreign backers, including elements within the EU Commission itself desired and fraudulently engineered. And even though this chicanery was manifestly obvious, guess what? The EU had no reluctance or compunction in accepting both Slovakia and the CzechRepublic as individual members of the EU.

So in that regard Jose Barroso is talking through his ass as he frequently does. For how can the idea of a democratically independent Scotland genuinely expressing the wishes of the Scottish people, if that’s what they really want and bearing in mind that Scotland is already a member of the EU, be anathema to assholes like Jose and his crew of brainless simians in the EU Commission yet Slovakia and the Czech Republic, where no such consensus was democratically secured, were both automatically welcomed back into the bosom of the EU, which effectively they never left, with open arms?

Debunking further the skewed logic of “Der EU Fuehrer, Herr Jose Barrosa” Slovenia was previously part of a sovereign and independent state called Yugoslavia that was also a full member of the UN just like all the EU member countries are. However, in gratitude for the assistance given to Nazi Germany during World War II by the Croatians who were similarly part of Yugoslavia but all the same odiously treacherous to the rest of the Yugoslavian people and their government as well as being avid Nazi activists and sympathizers, just as they still are today, during World War II in marked contrast to what the socialist Yugoslavian government along with most Yugoslavians were, Germany energetically agitated for the break up of Yugoslavia and was ably assisted in this cause by the UK together with many other EU countries with their own longstanding and thoroughbred Nazi pedigree and, of course, the United States simply because Yugoslavia was socialist and anything that remotely carried that stigma in the eyes of your average ignorant American, arguably totalling some two thirds of that country’s population, had to be destroyed. So that’s exactly what these self-styled but vastly hypocritical proponents of democracy did.

From that destruction emerged the Balkanization of the Balkans, you just couldn’t make that up, and Slovenia as well as Croatia along with Serbia, minus Kosovo thanks to the West’s interference yet again, Bosnia and all the rest of these ludicrous and largely unviable satrapies eventually did emerge claiming to be countries. But once again the EU’s rank double standards and the asinine remarks of its figurehead leader Jose Manuel Barroso came into focus. For Slovenia, as I’m sure you’ve either guessed or already know, having once been a part of the sovereign and independent state of Yugoslavia is now a fully fledged member of the EU as is Croatia which became a member in 2013. Interestingly too the Baltic States of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia that were also once a part of what was then the sovereign and independent entity the entire world knew as the USSR: a superpower, UN member and the holder of a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, were without any qualms, restrictions or reluctance, in fact it was very much the opposite in their respective cases, enthusiastically embraced into the foldof the EU, with the EU Commission very much the driving force behind this plan and the impetus for its implementation.

So you talking absolute garbage Jose Barroso as your ludicrous assumptions, for that’s exactly what they are and not lucid arguments, are all demonstrably crap. I could go on with more examples but I think those are enough to state my case; for you Jose are the without doubt the archetypical scumbag; since if you didn’t know of these well known cases what the fuck are you doing heading the EU as its President; and if you did know and still gave the dishonest impression calculatingly undertaken by you to do so that no such situations exist or would they be countenanced by you, the rest of the EU Commission or the general membership of the EU, what does that make you? As if sensible people don’t already know.

But what I found particularly chilling in its deviousness Jose is your ludicrous remark that Spain whose population is still largely and instinctively fascist as well as subliminally undemocratic to the core, would vote against Scotland remaining in the EU over Spain’s supposed and, even if these were true, irrelevant worries relative to Scotland’s own position concerning Spain’s own separatist movements. Are you or your fascist pals over the Iberian border for real Jose? Apart from the bizarre situation of the EU having been risibly given the Nobel Prize for democracy what the hell have the Scots exercising their democratic right to determine their own future have to do with Spain or its internal problems? And if Spain is seriously concerned about separatist movements within its borders shouldn’t it honestly and competently be dealing with these issues in an adult, mature and responsible fashion with those involved rather than Canute-like essay to arrogantly and patronizingly in Scotland’s casehold back the irreversible tides of political change by asininely and arbitrarily hitting out at Scotland that has nothing whatsoever to do with Spain’s long established and ongoing self-imposed problems?

For ask yourselves this simple question: why are there separatist movements in Spain in the first place? And if those who are influentially organizing and running them were comfortable being part of a unitary state called Spain or genuinely felt that their individual and collective future as well as their best interests lay with being politically or culturally a part of Spain why would they want to separate and independently run their own affairs? Not a logical move is it? So stymieing one’s desire to be free either by threats or other repressive measures as Spain, the Westminster posse of prominent politicians across the entire spectra of both houses of parliament, the Bank of England, the CBI with their vested interests, Jose Barroso himself and even the Co-Op among others are blatantly and self-interestedly doing, is nether a responsible nor democratic way to behave. At least I don’t think so!

Furthermore, isn’t Spain already among those other EU states telling countries in the global south, notably in Spain’s case it’s former colony of Venezuela where democracy noticeably for the very first time ever flourished under the stewardship of the late Hugo Chavez and continues to do so under his successor, what to do and how their countries? Kosovo, the so-called republic of Southern Sudan, East Timor, the wilful and dysfunctional breakup and political emasculation of Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and the very same maniacal and inimical overtures directed towards Syria to achieve the identical objectives all speak for themselves are the undoubted doings of the EU in tandem with the United States and NATO of which several EU states are longstanding members and the new recruits are even more belligerent warmongers.

So do grow up Jose and the rest of you. For how the hell can you say to the Catalonians, the Scots and others in Europe who want to be free it’s irrelevant what you’re after for we don’t want you to be. And what’s more we will insist and do our damnedest to make sure you don’t escape our clutches however democratic the process is that you devise so as to achieve your desired goals. Nevertheless in the name of the same democracy which we deny you we shall continue to arbitrarily and unilaterally reserve the right to dictate to targeted but sovereign and independent countries not even in our region how they should “democratically” conduct their own domestic affairs, and if they refuse to heed our advice or do as we tell them to we shall, as we customarily do, fabricate trumped up charges of human rights abuses or crimes against humanity against them so as to affect regime change advantageous to ourselves.

Absolutely despicable, but what the heck! Against this backdrop however let’s not forget that Scotland is a country in its own right. And the asinine attempt to punish it unjustly for having the sheer audacity to allow its citizens and residents to make an informed judgement on what should happen to Scotland is like some bullying parent or guardian taking great exception to and dictating to their son or daughter or some other person who was in their care but in either case is now an adult and wants to move out of the familial home and start an independent life of their own. But rather than give their blessing and helpful encouragement to this individual this prized jerk of a parent or guardian instead brings all manner of pressure to bear on them to make them stay put concomitant with directing the most perverse threats at them as well, in order to force that individual to do their parent or guardian’s bidding.

It’s utterly despicable conduct as I earlier said, and there’s no getting away from that! And although in Scotland’s case I’m not a Scot or a resident there and the decision isn’t mine as to whether Scotland stays in the UK or not, I don’t mind at all saying to the scurrilous detractors of a sovereign and independent Scotland who’ve no interest whatsoever in agreeing to much less having an informed debate, discussion or even a general conversation along those lines about Scotland relative to the pros and cons of it becoming an independent Scotland and will do so because I detest unfairness, hypocrisy and double standards, am British and Scotland is still legally a part of the United Kingdom, that you’re completely out of line in your attitudes and along with Jose Manuel Barroso should quite literally go and fuck yourselves, as you’ve nothing remotely constructive or interesting for that matter to say about this particular matter or that anyone with a functioning brain would want to hear.

Expanding further on the functioning brain analogy it’s rather understandable why the British government together with its parliamentary opposition of all parties want Scotland to stay in the UK. For starters Britain’s permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council would instantaneously, morally and legitimately become even weaker and precarious to justify than is presently the case, and a truncated UK’s position in the world generally would drastically diminish without the major and dominant partner England, in what currently is essentially a lopsided relationship that markedly favours England and does a great disservice to Scotland, not having Scotland all the same to perform as a convenient fig leaf for the UK’s but de facto England’s unwarranted aggrandizement.

Personally I wouldn’t regard this deserved diminution of status as particularly a bad thing since the status that Britain currently thinks it has is largely an artificial one, is effectively nothing more than smoke and mirrors, isn’t genuinely earned, heavily relies on its fawning sycophancy to the United States: an authentic world power that Britain hasn’t been for most of the 20th Century, and we’re presently in the 21st Century, and particularly so since the end of World War II. Stems directly from events that exceptionally transpired in the wake of the Allies collaborative and resounding defeat of Nazi Germany and its Axis collaborators in World War II, and expressly on Britain’s part harks back to an idealized view of reality that a quite significant number of white Caucasian Brits and consecutive UK governments, one and the same in their allied mindset, shamelessly and hubristically persist in routinely immersing themselves in, and which relates to an era previous to World War II when Britain still had an empire on which it was claimed the sun would never set.

But post World War II the sun had manifestly done so; however many ordinary Britons, our privileged elites and the powers that be who with a grotesque and perverse sense of their own entitlement to do so narcissistically run our country have continued to live in a state of denial with Britain’s true status in the world one that they find hard and truculently refuse to accept or come to terms with , preferring instead to persistently and delusionally carry on living in their comfortably ensconced world of make believe buttressed by an irremediable state of wilful blindness; that’s quite literally for them is a physical 21st Century presence pathetically regressed into the conveniently craved for existence of a bygone era.

Easy for me to understand why this is so but nevertheless impossible to condone or have any empathy with or sympathy for, let alone justify. For in analogous terms as much as I love and absolutely adore Mohammed Ali as the remarkable human being that he is and similarly so for his outstanding skills as the finest boxer the world has ever seen, I would none the less be totally appalled if someone or persons in authority exclusively going on this great man’s past record as a boxer decided that that alone makes Mohammad Ali in 2014 eligible to be still the Heavyweight Boxing Champion of the World. That wouldn’t make much sense; and the same applies to Britain and what was undoubtedly the huge empire that it once, and the operative word is once, controlled. For let’s face it, and try being honest with yourselves as well, the world has changed dramatically since 1945 and Britons as well as Britain with or without Scotland must also grasp that fact and move into the real world by realistically living in the present instead of ridiculously harking back to the past, and perhaps Scotland hiving itself off from this Aegean Stable that constitutes the UK might in the long run be the best thing that could ever happen to my country.

For in doing so it might very well conceivably focus the minds of all Britons and particularly those of the political apparatchiks that run our country to at least start dealing with reality and not the fantasy world they’ve construct, grown comfortably accustomed to and accordingly happily ensconce themselves in. The reality for instance of Britain being a somewhat middle ranking, offshore European country that’s not even the economic powerhouse in European terms, that position justifiably belongs to Germany, with other qualities to practicably offer the world, and not those analogously of a delusional, punch drunk boxer kidding himself he can make a successful comeback in the boxing ring he has unceremoniously been knocked out of for some time, or worst still asininely convinces himself that he’s still the undisputed principal boxing champion of the world.

Mohammad Ali had the grace, decency, dignity and obvious intelligence to know when to quit boxing, as do all other real champs, doing so while he was at the top of his game; and astute boxing fans love and affectionately remember this remarkable iconic figure for doing so and commemorate what he emphatically and innovatively together with successful aplomb brought to his particular sport. Try emulating him Britain before it’s too late and all that the world will remember you for is being an obdurate sourpuss, not unlike the aforementioned punch drunk boxer, with unrestrained but unachievable delusions of grandeur.

But right now the focus of our attention should be on allowing the Scots to make an informed judgement about their political future and not have a bevy of first-rate assholes either in the UK or worst still in the EU or its commission, however delusional they are like Jose Manuel Barroso, tell them or anyone else for that matter how they should run their own affairs. And the utterly useless energy of Jose Barroso would in my opinion be better utilized if he simply devoted his evidently unproductive time to seriously stemming and urgently eradicating the monumental corruption that’s endemic in the EU and especially the EU Commission where for decades now no honest firm of accountants can be swayed to sign off the EU’s accounts; which makes the endemic venal practices, snouts in the troughs, fraudulent expenses claims and all that sort of thing, engaged in by those within the UK’s parliament, abhorrent as they evidently are, look like minor indiscretions!

They say that love is in the eye of the beholder; curiously there’s no mention of lust which features more prominently than love in many, and arguably so the overwhelming majority of personal relationships that are either consensually or otherwise engaged in within our contemporary world. So where precisely, biologically speaking, is lust located?

Make the most of your Valentine’s Day and the opportunities, either handed to you on a platter or concertedly devised by you, that that day presents. However caution is advised and a few words of warning to boot in your shell-like! Namely, that whether you partake of these offered opportunities maturely or for that matter childishly is you affair, literally speaking, just as long as you’re prepared to accept the consequences that stem from your actions/activities on that day and accordingly deal effectively and accountably with them, and not expect the responsible members of your society or community come to that to be left with picking up the customary burdensome, financial tab for your casual and societally detrimental indiscretions!

Tuesday, 11 February 2014

Having expended a great deal of energy, commitment, hot air and much wilful misrepresentation vilifying the democratically debated process and decision that led to the passing by the Russian parliament of the legislation thereafter signed into law, as is his constitutional remit, by President Putin which outlawed the proselytization of homosexuality to minors or vulnerable young people within Russia by either individuals or groups, local or foreign, hell-bent on doing so, see the article: “Elena Isinbaeva and the west’s self-righteous penchant for creating bogus enemies.”

A law which incidentally is no different from that found in the UK, EU, USA, the rest of the western world and even their Persian Gulf Arab satrapies, western governments and their compliant media wasted no time or manufactured opportunities to publicly, hypocritically and lyingly lambast, without presenting a shred of concrete evidence to support their spurious claims, that the Russian Federation and its President Vladimir Putin are inveterate and pigheaded homophobes.

A dishonest proposition they also posited in their infantile and spiteful bid to at least tarnish the then upcoming 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics hosted by Russia and at the very worst encourage competing countries and athletes alike susceptible to their irrational and ideologically paranoid ranting to boycott these games; without any success it should be pointed out. However this didn’t stop the so-called Fox News broadcaster, CNN and the rest of these corporate institutions from persisting with their vitriolic campaign against Russia.

So-called media outlets I must emphasize that have as much credibility and veracity about them as if a government minister with the authority to do so nevertheless despicably abused it by putting a well known serial and convicted paedophile of the calibre of the late Jimmy Savile completely in charge of his country’s National Children’s Welfare Department and then had the breath-taking nerve and sheer audacity on TV and in the presence of this appointee to unconvincingly seek to persuade the populace at large that what was done was the right thing.

No sensible person would take either the respective minister or their appointee seriously; would conversely demand the immediate resignation of the minister concerned and along with that the instantaneous sacking as well of the minister’s preferred choice for that children’s organization job. In short justifiably treat them both as the prime assholes they are and the consummate pariahs they ought universally to be regarded as.

The identical contempt that should instinctively be meted out to the comparable slime balls that own, run and determine the twisted agendas so beloved by these purported western media corporations like Fox and CNN. With no traction, other than that manufactured by themselves, independently derived from their concerted endeavours relative to their crusade against an alleged Russian homophobic bias hope sprang eternal for these jerks when it was revealed that the Sochi venue had twin toilet facilities, namely two lavatory bowls next to each other in the same toilet cubicle.

Quick as a flash this was jumped on by CNN, Fox and the rest of them as classic example of Russian inefficiency, never mind that Russia is no longer a socialist state, a concept which these cretins passionately and obsessive hate as do most Americans. But ask yourselves if these so-called western media are as honest, vigorous and committed as they claim to be not only to promulgating but also actively pushing homosexual and lesbian equality to the same level or even beyond that of the kind heterosexuals of both genders take for granted shouldn’t this Sochi development be warmly welcomed and hailed as a major breakthrough for universal sexuality?

After all twin toilet bowls cubicles might just be the thing as well as a rather refreshing trend towards cementing homosexual and lesbian bonding respectively in what is after all one of the most private and dare I say exceedingly intimate and absolutely necessary pastimes indulged in, other than perhaps the physical act of sexual intercourse be this heterosexual, lesbian, homosexual or personal manual stimulation also known as masturbation, by us Homo sapiens. But I doubt whether the endemic morons ensconced at Fox, CNN, ABC, the BBC, Sky, ITV, Channel 4 and the rest of them have the perspicacity to even humorously see it that way.

Not least so because they’re professional whingers, spoilers and doomsayer addicts who literally get their rocks off by constantly complaining and usually doing so about things they know absolutely nothing about and to compensate for that and because they love nothing better than the sound of their own voices create their own asinine narrative which they then pass off as objective analysis; in other words the classic behaviour of the consummate and endemic moron. Do read my poem: “Exposé of the consummate endemic moron!”

Monday, 10 February 2014

Wilful blindness; that’s what it is! Further to my previous tweets regarding the asinine placing by white men across the board of all manner of white females, and specifically so in England, onto moralistic pedestals where logically they don’t belong and quite frankly look most incongruous standing there, I didn’t receive a single criticism relative to my published work; not that it mattered as I wouldn’t have given a damn anyway if I had since I was not only expressing my honest opinion but also the truth, and those who truly know me or appreciate my straightforwardness and consequently are acquainted with where I’m coming from know perfectly well that my conscience has never or will it ever have any difficulties with the truth much less find itself conveniently sacrificed on the altar of compromise known in this case as political correctness. However, I did get a number of complimentary emails on the subject from complete strangers to me as well as the customary supportive phone calls from family members and several close friends who tend to rally around when even they conclude that I’ve done something quite extraordinary even for me that is.

Which either meant that I embarrassingly struck a raw nerve with many of you out there shaming all the nerds who absurdly indulge in this ludicrous and most perverse pastime of theirs and who even if they don’t have any intention whatsoever of mending their idiotic ways neither did they have the gumption to defend what they’re doing nor the balls to criticize actions on my part, if indeed they really thought I was out of line, that are germane to their way of life. But deep in their subconscious minds I suspect they know that I’m not. Besides, I know the psychology of these pathetic jerks inside out to also realise that essentially they’re a bunch of feckless cowards whose behaviour is as transparently conditioned as that of Pavlov’s dogs.

From their judicial lordships and the coterie of other privileged, self-serving, book-learned but pre-eminently non-commonsensical prats wholly,egotistically and narcissistically wrapped up in themselves, a situation grotesquely compounded by the manifestly and bizarrely out of touch world they blissfully and zealously inhabit, right down to the amazingly unsophisticated, crass, intellectually challenged, xenophobic, beer-swilling, football obsessed, celebrity-fixated, X-Factor aficionado and macho-deluded, white thug, the conditioning is virtually the same albeit administered to varying degrees.

And while the judge, his lower court county squire magisterial underling, chief constables and their senior colleagues, high flying barristers, prominent politicians or First Division Civil Servants who addictively and quite willingly subject themselves to the mutually acceptable, and evidently for them, beneficial flagellatory sexual chastisement meted out to them in some posh hotel located in one of our major cities or the ultra expensive, all fetishes scrupulously catered for, Madame Sin type, clandestine whorehouse that the more well-heeled of those aforementioned clients frequent might be light years financially and socially distanced from the daily existences of their lower caste white specimens, they all nevertheless have one thing in common.

It’s the inveterate inability coupled with a marked reluctance to sever the umbilical link to their mothers who they know from close observation of them, though they’re adamantly reluctant to admit this even to themselves preferring to live instead in a state of wilful denial, aren’t the virtuous paragons they purport to be but rather aces of the art of manipulation who cynically con others into thinking they’re what they most evidently aren’t; and this sits most uneasily with these men who know that something is terribly wrong but haven’t the fortitude to do anything constructive about it. And it’s this unhealthy umbilical link that fucks up everything for these men where white women are concerned rendering everyone from judges to your average football hooligan of being utterly unable and moreover quite unwilling to properly and justly upbraid or appropriately punish white women when basic commonsense dictates that they should do so.

And all this against the subliminal backdrop of having undeservingly and farcically freely put these women onto an elevated and glorified pedestal in the first place, and that to do otherwise would constitute a dreadful betrayal of them in tandem with the implicit condemnation of their own cuckolding and even whoring mothers, sisters, wives, partners or daughters; and as such amount to a concerted act of misogyny. Well I don’t buy any of that shit and never have, since I know from personal experience that among white women, and especially their British/English counterparts of every background and social status, some can be exceptionally good, others utterly bad, absolutely worthless, indifferent, devious, scheming or positively evil to name just a few of their standard characteristics, just like most women everywhere in fact; humans and not angels.

And while I couldn’t give a toss what our British judges and those involved in our legal system get up to in their private lives behind closed doors that for me is as far as it goes. For in the arena of justice I want to see objectivity, discernment, fair play and just punishment where appropriate for all those of whatever gender who are arraigned before a legitimate court in our green and pleasant land having been alleged to have fallen foul of the law. Not have our justices and magistrates where white women are concerned allow their dicks or compulsive Oedipus Rex fixations to cloud their judgements. For what they’re currently delivering in this skewed scenario of theirs quite frankly stinks! I’m a British citizen not some bloody subject and despite my criticisms of it for what I not only perceive to be wrong but also know is the case I do love my country and want to be proud of it; and one doesn’t have to be a misogynist to vocalize that point of view.

For what goes on in British society generally and more particularly the English legal system per se and specifically so the English judiciary relative to how white Caucasian females are usually perceived; the preferential treatment routinely and disproportionately handed out to them generally, as well as those who cynically, manipulatively or increasingly as it happens murderously but it must be said existentially all the same wilfully pervert the course of justice and in relative terms, if they’re punished at all, get little more than a playful slap on the wrist from our magistrates and judges for their criminal activities compounded by empathetic bleeding hearts doling out undeserving sympathy to them, is to put it mildly a bloody scandal and disgrace, and objectively looked at a criminal concept itself that is transparently manifestly devoid of any morality whatsoever.

Wilful blindness is how I see it that is based in England where this belief is deeply embedded on the ludicrous precept of the inviolability and even the sanctity of white Caucasian womanhood, and more especially so if that white female happens to be English/British!

That’s why I want to wholeheartedly congratulate the scriptwriters of two of my favourite TV dramas: Midsommer Murders and Murder She Wrote, for their excellently insightful, practical and realistic representation of women, including white Caucasian ones, showing them as they should be warts and all, resolutely refusing to pander to the nauseatingly sanitized version of these white Caucasian women that recurrently we see portrayed in our UK courts and society generally of every white woman being categorized as nothing less than the Virgin Mary herself incarnate. This has to stop if Britain is ever to emerge as a nation of genuine gender equality; as apart from everything else it’s insulting and particularly patronizing as well to all intelligent women.

They say that the poor will always be with us; I wholeheartedly disagree. Not in the least so because it’s my firm conviction that if the authentic international community genuinely had a mind to it could permanently eradicate global poverty in a relatively short space of time. A personal conviction that leads me to similarly believe that the same thing could be done in respect of the rank, pervasive and wholly pernicious stupidity with its attendant dire consequences that regrettably the less discerning among us quite liberally tolerate and even make excuses for but which undoubtedly is dangerously inimical to the welfare of our respective societies generally and the best interests of humanity in particular.

Long before he became Prime Minister of Britain and well in advance of the meteoric rise of the Nazis to power in Germany as well as the rest of continental Europe Winston Churchill a life-long eugenicist advocated the compulsory sterilization of such people in Britain to prohibit them from breeding with each other, producing more of their kind and consequently with their defective intellectual genes contaminating the wholesome stock of the rest of British society. The Nazis of course had their own inimitable solution to this problem – the holocaust; while the Soviets and their satellite satrapies periodically carried out their own pogroms to eradicate their undesirables.

Whatever methods are employed in the 21st Century is a moot point since there is no mistaking the obvious fact that something has to be done to remedy this contagious and fast escalating problem. And while race, ethnicity, skin colour, social class or background, financial status, gender, religion, nationality or the espousal of different and even controversial opinions that are completely divergent from those of mainstream thinking must not under any circumstance subjectively become or solely render those in these categories eligible for either individual or selective compulsory eradication, specifically so because diversity and the ability to constructively think and act outside and beyond the accepted confines of conformity are salient ingredients that act as the catalyst and even serve as the bedrock of a truly progressive and mutually beneficial society for all those genuinely deserving of being the recipients of such, anything else that stand in the way of this must be implacably excised. Endemically rank, pervasive and pernicious stupidity falls squarely, in my opinion, within this must be proscribed category.

No sensible person who values their life would adamantly resist an amputation and hang on to an incurable, highly infectious and life-threatening gangrenous leg on the asinine basis that they were born with two legs and two legs are what they’re going to retain. Similarly you wouldn’tin a public common room observe a prized idiot, however old that individual was, walk into that same room, extract a live grenade from their duffel coat and unconcernedly watch them proceed to mess around with it on the pretext that it’s none of your business or they’re simply whiling away the time. Nor would you, I suspect, like any other intelligent person tolerate or have any sympathy whatsoever for an inveterate arsonist who sets fire to your house in the dead of night while you and the other residents there were fast asleep and in the process gravely endangers your life.

Only for you all on being rescued later told by some official absurdly seeking to exculpate this moron’s criminal activitythat he or she had uncaring parents while they were growing up though they all lived in the lap of luxury. Or else that that person came from a disadvantaged background and allowances should be made for them. Or even more bizarrely that this individual liked creating fires because the commotion they caused, the fire service racing to the scene, and the life and limb risks that their arsonist propensities subjected you and your family to, as well as others who had previously been placed in similar circumstances, gave him or her a sexual high which they were unable to achieve in normal relationships as they just didn’t have any of their own. Therefore you must be understanding; biblically turn the other cheek; and simply forgive and forget. It’s not rocket science to determine what your reaction would be.

So why then do our societies persist in tolerating and even indulging brain dead morons that even the administering of lobotomies to them couldn’t remedy their situation, and who furthermore are infinitely more dangerous to the rest of us in every conceivable way? We cull animals, don’t we? Quite often needlessly so; so why not our human detritus as well?

On that note I’d like to dedicate the attached poem to Leslie Philbert, Dean Cry and those of a similar mindset. I wouldn’t say that they inspired me to write this poem, oh no; as collectively they would be completely incapable of inspiring even the most incontinent individual to have a piss or otherwise go to the loo, just that unwittingly on their part they’ve substantially provided me with all the material I could ever have needed to create this poem.

Monday, 3 February 2014

A white British man gets murdered on his yacht it’s alleged on the Caribbean island of St. Lucia and immediately British media hype and Foreign Office spin go into overdrive and it’s headline news even though the factual events surrounding this killing are very scarce to say the least; something which even the Sky News reporter admits to. But what the hell! The dead man is white and his alleged killers are Black, Caribbean and fit in well with the stereotypical white image of the endemically violent black man who wherever he is on Planet Earth, be it the UK or in his own backyard for example, poses a dangerous threat to white people. The fact that whites from every part of the globe regularly go off to the Caribbean on holiday, do business and even live there, and that several prominent British and other international celebrities have expensive homes there, setting aside the quite noticeable fact, if one must, that there are and have been since colonial times white citizens of these separate and diverse Caribbean territories are factual realities missed by these white morons getting hot under the collar and vaulting up on to their high horses over this death.

The reality that there are more deaths in a single day on English roads alone, let alone the entire UK, than there are murders of whites in the Caribbean in a full calendar year conveniently escapes the furtive minds of these white idiots essaying to create racial mischief for their own perverse and sick agendas. Don’t British whites, one must logically ask, get killed in white Caucasian dominated countries other than Britain itself? And while the murder of an individual irrespective of the victim’s skin colour, racial origin or nationality is quite understandably a tragedy for their loved ones regardless of where in the world that incident took place and accordingly should be reported on its merit especially by the media of the country where the murder victim came from, it’s no business normally of the British Foreign Office just because that individual happens to be British to automatically and aggressively without genuine extenuating circumstances that warrant this approach to stick its oar in. And it’s a given that if this murdered Brit had been Black neither the British Foreign Office, Sky News nor any of our media outlets, print or electronic, would have given a damn far less have reported that black individual’s demise.

Furthermore in the aftermath of the thousand of Blacks, most of them of Caribbean origin, brutally and gratuitously murdered or even executed by the British authorities: police, prison officers, agents for the UK government and specifically for the Home Office: relative to the latter: Jamaican Joy Gardner readily comes to mind, or even plain, common-o-garden racist killers with police connections and in cahoots with them, they all know that they can count on blanket immunity for protection to carry out these murders, Stephen Lawrence was an example of such; but had any Caribbean government or its Foreign Minister sought to do exactly what their British counterparts routinely do here when white Britons come to grief in non-white ruled countries and are once again at it by meddlesome involving themselves in the St. Lucia matter, such governments or their Foreign Ministers would have been given short shrift by the British government, told to mind their own business, sternly reminded that the UK was a sovereign, independent country and lectured on not interfering in British domestic affairs.

No intention however on the part of Britain to heed its own advice when the boot is on the other foot though. And if Britain is so keen on impartially protecting the interests of everyone of its citizens or legitimate residents in the UK how come then that it has done bugger all to have freed the last remaining British resident in Guantanamo Bay, illegally and arbitrarily incarcerated there on trumped up terrorism charges that have longed been debunked and leave no stone unturned to get him home to be with his British family? Or has the British mouse selectively taken to roaring at those it feels it can successfully bully; and knows, poor thing, that even with reasoned and commonsensical arguments the United States won’t pay a blind bit of notice to what it has to say, and especially so if it tried to use the same strong-arm tactics that it’s employing against the government of St. Lucia?

St Lucia which is a member of the Commonwealth whose judicial and parliamentary systems are based exclusively on those of Westminster; whose chosen and nationally approved constitutional Head of State despite St. Lucia being a sovereign and independent county although previously a British colony as well as being a fully-fledged member of CARICOM and the United Nations is Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II of England, so what legal practices that go on in that country are essentially English instituted. And in that regard it makes no sense, but people like me know why it happens all the same, why the British Foreign Office should be so unduly concerned over the death of a solitary white British male in St. Lucia when the very same people in London creating this manufactured storm in a teapot along with their white counterparts throughout other British ministerial departments, the UK government altogether and even the British parliament generally neither individually nor collectively give a damn about the tens of thousands of criminal deaths of black people, principally of Caribbean origin, in Britain.

Additionally, unlike the UK St. Lucia like several other former British Caribbean territories now fully independent as well have the death penalty on their statute books for the crime of murder, and it’s an ironic twist that the highest judiciary authority for many of them, which the general populace and some local politicians are now trying to overturn and implement instead with an indigenous and Caribbean wide Supreme Court of their own, is the judiciary arm of the British House of Lords.

Therefore all the natural bases and areas of concern that the British government might reasonably have had in completely different circumstances regarding this white Briton who lost his life in St. Lucia are fully and quite transparently covered. Consequently, the only interest I can see that the British government and others of its mindset can possibly have in this case is one based solely on ethnicity; he’s white, well-to-do, and probably has connections to some person(s) with influence or power in Britain’s social hierarchy. And those in my opinion are neither satisfactory nor sound enough reasons to unwarrantedly interfere in the internal affairs of St. Lucia, especially when the judicial system there is, as I’ve earlier pointed out, identical to that of England where this white man comes from.

Much too is was made in Sky News report that St. Lucia is a popular holiday destination which its idiots reporting this story either idiotically or conveniently didn’t mention in their discourse that St Lucia wouldn’t be so regarded, irrespective of how ideal the weather, beaches and other attractive features it has to offer, if the country was a haven of mindless criminality or a jihadist centre: never mind that St. Lucians like all other Caribbean people are solidly Christian, for the gratuitous slaughter of whites, which St. Lucia no more so than the other West Indian territories most certainly isn’t. But with white racist idiots in full flow such factors don’t matter and why the hell they figure let facts get in the way of or disrupt the narrative of a nice racist story?

Therefore, it’s perfectly obvious why the tourism element is so ludicrously being drawn into the narrative of this white Briton’s death. Candidly it’s a blackmail tactic, a sort of crude revenge to force the St. Lucian authorities into caving in to UK demands relative to the arrest, prosecution, conviction and almost certainly the execution of any black suspect(s) for this white man’s death; and manifestly has nothing at all to do with justice or the due process of law. All of which is a pernicious red herring to boot.

Advocates in Britain for the preservation of the British monarchy cite its pulling power and other factors closely associated with this as key components in our own tourism industry and the huge financial benefits that the UK and England specifically accrue from it. Be that as it may. But the number of murders that there are annually in England alone let alone the rest of the UK, even if one were to charitably set aside the many racist black ones by our respective authorities, not only significantly dwarf all those that take place in tiny St. Lucia but collectively as well those across the entire Caribbean region for the same calendar period. But I don’t see or haven’t observed in any way that those British murders have in anyway adversely impacted on British tourism; any more so than murders in other white-ruled countries globally are likely to impact negatively on their own tourism.

The US where its murder capital Chicago isn’t only a blight on the conscience of humanity but quite recently was featured as a news-series on the same Sky News channel which now wants to belittle St. Lucia because a white British man was killed there, and in St. Lucian terms is as rare an occurrence as one could get; and in equally bizarre terms would be tantamount to Sky News Eamonn Holmes masturbating himself on his early morning show Sunrise for the benefit of his co-presenter Charlotte Hawkins, or any of the other ladies who frequently feature on that show; notwithstanding that though it didn’t stop Sky News from taking the less than impartial stance it took as regards this St. Lucian killing.

No offence was intended to any of those specifically mentioned or referred to as such behaviour most certainly wouldn’t happeneven if Eamonn Holmes was predisposed to doing so; just a leg pull lad, as apart from everything else you’re the consummate professional in your job. But what I’m demonstrating here by deliberately using this utterly ridiculous and rather farfetched analogy is to clearly show how skewed and subjectively bigoted these kinds of race reports are in tandem with the concerted and extraordinary lengths that elements within the British media go to distort facts and situations for their own perverse, twisted, demented and racial ends when quite often there’s no such controversy in the matter to realistically start with.

And it really is a clear-cut case of the British Foreign Office, to be quite honest, to be donning its battle helmet and other fighting gear while farcically going on the warpath and actually spoiling for a fight with St. Lucia over the as yet evidently unresolved circumstances of this white man’s death when its Foreign Secretary William Hague and the full British Con-Dem, coalition regime are adamant, in the face of intensively researched, investigated, well-documented, and irrefutable acts of multiple war crimes, crimes against humanity, murder, torture and the rest of it routinely and gratuitously committed in Iraq and elsewhere by the British military at the specific behest of the British government, MoD and the Armed Forces military top brass, that the United Kingdom shouldn’t even be investigated let alone have those personally involved in these most heinous of activities indicted, tried in a genuinely impartial court out of the reach of UK or western political influence or interference and if found guilty duly and harshly punished for what they did.

This coming in the aftermath of Mark Duggan’s public and extra-judicial execution by the British police in London on the 4th August 2011. A case in which the police have not told the truth about what actually took place; have from the outset treated Mark Duggan’s family with the utmost contempt, and as the IPCC has rather belatedly been forced to publicly admit having itself initially coseyed up with the said police and originally allowed itself to be easily taken in by their calculated lies, are now openly saying that the cops involved have from the very start of this saga and still are adamantly refusing to have face to face interviews with this legislatively constituted body the IPCC, set up to investigate controversies involving the police, to even tell it from their perspective what took place in the run up to and actually occurred during the ultimate killing by them of Mark Duggan.

Rather than do this as any other body or individual(s) either having observed or physically taken part in an incident that caused someone to lose their life would automatically be expected to and by all people the police - most people generally feel the need to explain themselves especially if they’re innocent of something, a view the police normally hold but only when it doesn’t involve themselves reinforcing this conclusion that if people they question don’t then others are perfectly entitled to draw their own conclusions – or quickly find themselves arrested and charged with at least obstructing the law or else perverting the course of justice, what we have here in the Mark Duggan case and others as well are the police, whose legal and constitutional remit is to uphold law and order and actively assist in the prosecution, conviction and jailing of wrongdoers, being a law unto themselves and wilfully revoking the same precepts they’re meant to maintain when they themselves are either involved in criminal activities or are the subject of such.

As a rejoinder their vacuously response always rolled out and especially noticeable in the Mark Duggan case being that they’ve submitted written statements to the IPCC and therefore that’s an end to the matter. Consequently, no face to face interviews allowing the opportunity for them to be questioned and importantly from the answers given have these cross-examined with what has been said in written police statements or against other germane information gathered elsewhere aren’t necessary the police concur; for to have to submit to face to face interviews or questioning would they asininely and unconvincingly claim amount to the police being treated as suspects.

What a load of fucking codswallop! What’s among the very first things that the police do when they investigate others privy to a crime or who, however vaguely so, might know someone who’s possibly connected to it? They ask those involved for precise information of where they were or what they were doing when the crime occurred; and should any of those who’re being questioned ask why the customary police response is that they’re seeking to eliminate people not involved in that particular crime from their enquiry. Conversely, if any individual whether guilty or innocent refuses to cooperate the police then invite them to either voluntarily accompany them to the local police station or else be arrested and taken there for, you guessed it, a face to face interview. One you can bet your last Pound on it will be specifically designed to ascertaining facts which will be pertinent to discovering the truth and also assist in solving that particular crime.

Of course no face to face interview is of itself an indication that the individual being questioned is guilty of any crime; in fact it’s very much to the contrary and allows those being questioned to fully or at least satisfactorily demonstrate their lack of culpability. And as the head of the IPCC posits sensible and objective members of the public would want to know why on earth would the police not want to cooperate in this way?

I’ll go much further and say it’s because they’re as guilty as hell and know they’ll be discovered to be if they opened their mouths. Feral, sadistic and sociopathic killer cops who with impunity wantonly subvert the said laws they’re meant to uphold and, what’s more, know they’re granted absolute immunity from the powers that be: the Home Office, Cabinet Ministers and de facto the government of the day, the official Parliamentary Opposition, the heads of police forces and the Metropolitan Police in particular, to do whatever they want and get away with it. Doing so under the lying and pretentious pretext advanced by this collective of influential morons that these cops put their lives on the line for us. For the powers that be clearly and those who pull their strings; but as I see it the only lives that these odious detritus of humanity put on the line are those whom they barbarically and rather sadistically murder then sickeningly, even when the facts discernibly belie their assertion, claim that they did so in self-defence.

Little wonder then that the last thing these culpable bastards want is to be confronted face to face with their criminality, where unintentional body language and all the rest of it can be a dead give away; no pun intended. For any idiot if he or she can string a couple of sentences together can set down in a statement, which they know won’t be properly vetted, whatever lies and fantasies they want to embellish. And these British cops like their US and Israeli counterparts that they not only emulate but have extremely close and operational training ties with are remarkably good at that; the classic professional liars then our British Bobbies. Not a patch one can unquestionably argue on the fictional Chief Inspector Morse or the Detective Chief Inspectors Frost, Barnaby or Banks that we encounter in our popular British television police soaps of the calibre of Inspector Morse, A Touch of Frost, Midsomer Murders and DCI Banks which evidently give an insight of how the British should be conducting themselves, instead of in real life more analogous, our boys in blue, and if truth be told to Pol Pot’s murdering thugs!

And while on the thorny subject of our police adamantly refusing face to face interviews basing their twisted reasoning and skewed arguments on the ludicrous assumption that during their clear acts of criminality, for that’s what they were, they were simply carrying out their duty, didn’t the UK at the Nuremburg Tribunals convict and put a number of World War II, German officials to death on the sole principle that simply following orders which were inherently criminal whether explicitly or implicitly known to be the case or not at the time wasn’t a legitimate defence for the perpetrator(s) defence? So what has changed since then and now for the British police to rely so pigheadedly on this categorically flawed and outlawed provision as their only defence, when it’s the same premise that was instituted by Britain for the Nuremburg Tribunals, has been globally accepted and ratified as a cornerstone of international law, and which Britain itself still ardently uses to prosecute, convict and jail those who it deems fit to go after.

So in view of all that let me put this straightforward scenario to you. You’re a parent who might even happen to be a police officer and you’re at home when there’s a knock on your door. You answer it and the upshot of that unexpected visit is you’re informed that your spouse or partner and your two young children were knocked down and killed on the high street in the community where you all lived by a motorist. That’s all the information you’re made privy to. Nothing else! You aren’t told who the driver is, the circumstances under which this tragedy took place, or why this information is being withheld from you.

What you do know is that your loved ones are dead; that the unnamed motorist who killed them and those others in the vehicle at the time with that motorist and are fully aware of what actually happened while prepared to give written statements of their colluded versions of this tragic event resolutely refuse to be personally interviewed about the matter by the police while advocating all sorts of asinine reasons for not doing so; and furthermore expect not only to be left alone but also allowed to get away with what they’re doing.

Now apart from the fact that no police service worthy of the name would tolerate such contempt for the law, nor would reason or commonsense permit a situation of that nature to prevail, you as that aggrieved parent, spouse or partner and whatever your status was wouldn’t tolerate it either and would insist on getting truthful answers to the several and legitimate queries surrounding the deaths of your loved ones. And if one were to even momentarily but quite absurdly decide to put the law aside which shouldn’t happen in the first place, what you would still be demanding in the circumstances, and especially so in these somewhat bizarre ones, is what any genuinely objective individual with a functioning brain calls natural justice. Something that each and every one of us is inalienably entitled to and where prejudices of any kind simply don’t have any jurisdiction nor should they ever be permitted to play any part in what eventually transpires.

Bearing all that in mind and drawing fully on the undoubtedly deep traumatic emotions that you would find yourselves subjected to in the scenario I described earlier, why on earth then should the police be given a blank cheque to either evade or avoid, or both, their lawful responsibilities in outlining, as they would expect or demand of others to do in similar situations, something that they’re expressly and murderously involved with themselves? But just as sickening why do you allow them to get away with it, because it’s not you, your family or friends on the receiving end of what they’re criminally doing, or even more sinister because the victims don’t look like you? Cynically and asininely deluding yourselves that the police are just doing their job and are there to protect you. Since when is gratuitously or racially murdering someone the job or remit of any civilized police force on Planet Earth?

Taking that fully into consideration why then should Mark Duggan’s family or those of the many thousands of other Blacks or whites like Ian Tomlinson who were murdered by the British police or were stitched up for crimes they didn’t commit, then convicted by bent jurors in the pay of the police and jailed for lengthy prison terms and then only through the untiring efforts of their kith and kin and their supporters had their cases reopened and their miscarriages of justice brought to light not be similarly entitled to the same respectful consideration you would want and moreover demand for yourselves, attendant with the natural justice for their loved ones that they rightfully deserve?

If you’re not familiar with these cases then I suggest that instead of being willing slaves for and addicts to the propagandistic and self-serving narratives consistently promulgated by the powers that be , the British police forces themselves and their corporate media conspirators, including the BBC that our licence fee funds and that it abuses in the most appalling manner, that you start utilizing your brains, learn to think for yourselves and research the background of just these few examples of proven and pervasive British police criminality to see specifically who and what our police forces really are; endemic racists aligned just as their Greek counterparts are to far-right, neo-Nazi groups and underworld criminals. Not the sham image of the cuddly, all-helpful British Bobby as their concerted propagandistic portrayal would have you believe.

Here then are the cases that I’d particularly like you to pore over where innocent people stitched up by the British police spent inordinately lengthy periods of time in jail for crimes they not only didn’t commit but had no knowledge whatsoever of, and where the then Master of the Rolls, one so-called Lord Denning, Britain’s most senior judge notoriously, patronizingly and quite publicly said even after their miscarriage of justice convictions were correctly quashed that it would have been infinitely better had these wrongly convicted people been kept in jai and if we still had the death penalty hanged, even though they were innocent, rather than the British judicial system of which he was a major player to have been seen to be at fault. He wasn’t sacked for his loathsome remarks by the government at the time and just as appalling no one in the legal profession saw fit to criticize him for having made them. Maybe a case of similar minds, or more fittingly identical mindsets, thinking alike. This completely obnoxious bastard is now thankfully dead and I for one hope that he rots eternally in hell; but he’s not alone among our judiciary, even in 2014, with this quite reprehensible point of view.

The cases I earlier referred to and as I said I would like for you to look up online are: The Cardiff Three; Birmingham Six; Guildford Four; and the Bridgewater Three just for starters. Chillingly had Britain kept the death penalty which it previously always had and that several nutters across the board in British society, even in 2014, would quite happily like to see reinstated, these men – one of the Birmingham Six falsely accused and convicted actually died in prison – all of whom went to prison, and this cannot be stressed often enough, for crimes they were wholly innocent of but stitched up for by the British police, would all have died on the gallows. But despite many years later having been exonerated for these crimes and released from prison these men still have to live with the stark reality that the police officers who put them there, whose criminality is now commonplace and were the death penalty still an option would similarly and callously have had them hanged, notwithstanding that have got away Scot-free with their criminal conduct.

So when next you’re inclined to start draping yourself in the British flag, ostentatiously traipse out your fake patriotic credentials and begin putting on your asinine airs of how wonderful our police forces are and should be supported come what may, I suggest you start first by subjecting yourself to a reality check and if that fails then opt for a lobotomy, for sad creature that you are you most certainly are in desperate need of one. For if despite all the facts glaringly staring you in the face of what exactly the British police are: sick, predatory thugs or imbeciles that routinely cover up for their colleagues, you still can’t or won’t face reality then you too firmly belong to that same category of human detritus fit only in my opinion to be beneficially harvested for your body parts, your brains of course naturally excluded since realistically they won’t be any bloody good either to man or beast. The German Nazis and their World War II collaborators profitably melted down their Untermenchen for all sorts of commodities including soap; but personally if that were to happen with our Undesirable equivalent I most certainly wouldn’t want to use any soap either coming from you or those murderous cops you fanatically and racially support even to wash my ass in the event of having visited the loo, done there and then subsequently vacating the lavatory bowl.

In Sky News’ report on the St. Lucia killing great emphasis was placed on this white man being killed while supposedly defending his wife. As one distinguished black US civil rights activist once famously remarked: “I know a lynching when I see one; and don’t need to be told what a lynching is.” And what, I wonder, would white media broadcasters do without their customary racial stereotypes to play on and enhance their racist credentials? The Blackman’s prevalent and voracious sexual urge being to copulate with any and every white woman there is regardless of who she is or what she looks like. Talk about the gramophone needle stuck in the same groove!

Having taken a sabbatical from my teaching job at the time I went to Barbados, that’s also in the Caribbean if you’re not cognisant of that fact and is in fact a close geographical neighbour of St. Lucia, where as a qualified journalist I worked for one of the major newspapers there. One day while relaxing on the beach I noticed the many voluntary sexual assignations going on between local black men and white Caucasian, female tourist from around the globe holidaying there but principally from the UK. Interestingly enough though while the other white women, even those from other parts of the EU, the US and Canada for example, were pretty relaxed about what they were doing and in most instances the men they were with were longstanding lovers who they saw on a regular basis when they visited the island and even resided with; although it’s fair to say that not infrequently so some of these men were proper boyfriends of these women but obviously had no wish to leave Barbados, and I personally know of several instances where the women in these relationships actually moved to the island, got married to the men in their lives there and are still residing in 2014 with their Bajan husbands in Barbados.

However in typical hypocritical fashion the majority white British women acted quite differently. They enthusiastically had and even sought out sex with the local men which as consulting adults they were perfectly at liberty to do I suppose, even if their sexual activities were being immorally carried out largely behind the backs of their husbands or partners. That said, they were also other instances where some husbands or partners and even boyfriends who’d accompanied them to the island on their joint holiday quite knowingly turned a blind eye to what their women were in fact getting up; commonly because they were also on the make themselves, got sexually turned on by it all, or in typical cuckolding fashion and with no fuss gave in to the sexual demands of women who evidently dominated them; at least psychologically so.

Tongue in cheek I had a light-hearted conversation regarding this matter with my editor who was a white American female married to a black Barbadian man who she’d chosen to leave her white American husband and their family for and suggested to her a story which had cropped up in my head. Fundamentally, to personally interview in depth as many of these white female tourists that I could manage and candidly ask them why they were behaving as they were.

My editor was rather sceptical to say the least that I would manage to get these tourists of every marital status, as I wasn’t simply after married females, to speak openly or honestly to me; much less so the British women who on the island and throughout the rest of the Caribbean have a very unflattering reputation for dropping their knickers the moment they arrive while at the same time dispensing with their fabricated diffidence just as effortlessly only to reassemble the latter just as readily the moment they arrive at the airport for their flight back home to Blighty where they can all assume again their cunningly constructed role of individuals in whose mouths butter wouldn’t melt.

Sceptical she might have been but my editor didn’t try to stop me nor would she have succeeded f she’d tried; and besides the rapport between the two of us was such that she knew it would be pointless trying to. Well I can categorically report that I successfully chatted to and interviewed at various stages and different levels a large cross-section of those that I wanted to including my fellow Brits. I was open with all of them about what I was doing, promised them anonymity and secured their trust. I even played back my tape recordings to them as and when it was necessary to do so and also offered, if they wanted to, to let them see my written notes on them. But there weren’t any takers on that offer as by then, I suppose, they all trusted me knowing full well that I would hardly have volunteered something like that if there wasn’t mutual trust all round.

When the article was finished I informed them of its publication date and those who wouldn’t be in Barbados then asked for details of how they could get copies and were given these. The article itself was a hit; sold many copies and became a very popular discussion topic on the major phone in programmes and talk-shows on the island. I was asked to participate in these but declined as I didn’t want in any discourse to give away my trade secrets as it were not even to my editor who eventually gave up when she couldn’t persuade me to tell her how I managed it; and as always I have confidentially firmly stayed mum on this matter.

So the idea that black men are voracious sexual predators where white women are concerned is a load of nonsense. A myth created during slavery and the colonial era when white men constantly essaying to lastingly emasculate the Blackman and at the same time sexually abuse black women as well had to devise ways and means to justify their barbarity and bestiality towards Blacks in general while consolidating their perverted lust in respect of black women in particular.

First they came up with their bogus science that black women couldn’t be raped as their vaginas were not only comprehensively different from those of white women but were also constructed in such a way as to make black women sexually insatiable and constantly in oestrus; interestingly enough a term that people often use in connection with and one normally associates with animals not human beings; but then Blacks at that time and even now in 2014 to a significant number of whites simply aren’t human. Therefore having sex with black women even without their consent, an activity were it embarked on with a white woman in similar circumstances would be regarded as rape couldn’t be such in the case of a black woman whites argued. And besides the bodies of black women were always aching for sex, so having sex with them in any circumstance, freely or involuntarily so on their part, was essentially a charitable act of kindness while doing them a big favour as it were, if such sexual activities were committed, of course, by white men!

The unvarnished truth however is that colonialist minded white men obsessively had the hots for black women but since they had made them slaves and deemed them to be inferiors of theirs they couldn’t very well admit this even to themselves let alone recognize them as either their social or eligible equals. No more so than then or now where one of our 21st Century royals or members of the British aristocracy more concerned about ludicrously preserving their so-called bloodline, in actuality just as counterfeit as they themselves are, could; were they to be having a similar covert sexual assignation with someone of colour and who was automatically regarded as being outside their perceived and acceptable circle of worthy companions. It wouldn’t have happened then and it sure as hell won’t happen now in Britain in 2014.

In the Caribbean white planters were notorious for their gang rape of black women. However the above state of affairs was not unique among the British since the other European colonialists did exactly the same thing. As a result 99% of Caribbean and US Blacks and a substantial number of those who either knowingly or unwittingly so pass for white Caucasians have mixed race blood; with every individual of black Caribbean extraction and the overwhelming majority of Blacks in the US, most especially those persons who are the descendants of those forced into slavery, even in 2014 involuntarily for the most part still carry the white male Y chromosome in their genetic makeup: the unquestionable result of the systemic and systematic sexual abuse and rape of black women by white males during slavery and colonialism.

And how’s this for a nerve-jangling but all the same highly germane elucidation in relation to all you obstinately bigoted and racist jerks out there utterly besotted with yourselves, your so-called white supremacy and unblemished bloodline when it’s a known fact and empirically documented that in Britain alone, among European countries, 36% of you aren’t fathered by those that you’re either deceitfully led to believe or lyingly told by cuckolding mothers are your biological fathers; biological fathers that you’ll never learn anything about let alone ever get to know. The immoral outcome and the bastard progeny derived from the immense cuckolding by white women of their husbands and partners who either unknowingly fired blanks and in many instances are still doing so or else were callously duped by their spouses or partners into believing they fathered children they clearly never sired.

Go on! Let the brilliant technology of DNA assist you out of your familial ignorance if you’ve got the bottle to, rather than asininely going around claiming to be someone you aren’t while contemptuously looking down on those who racially are different from and having the bloody nerve to regard yourselves as superior to them; when it’s very much the other way around since they at least know who their true biologically origins. For one unintended upside of slavery and colonialism was that unlike whites Blacks didn’t have either to be secretive about or dishonestly pretend who it was they were voluntarily fucking with or who’d actually fathered their children. Something they honestly knew, even when the father was the slave owner who had raped them. So what have you got to say about that Aryan and member of the Master Race, I don’t think!

Furthermore, the dominance of whites over Blacks was such and so determined were these white men and women – there were always white dykes around even then – to have these black women as their sexual playthings and do so at will that if a black woman during slavery dared to refuse a white person sexually she could be savagely beaten, branded with a red-hot iron on whatever part of her body that her abuser capriciously chose to inflict this sadistic punishment and any children that the black woman already had sold off into slavery elsewhere never to be seen again either by each other or their mother. And so pervasive and cruel was this abuse coupled with its prevalent hypocrisy that Thomas Jefferson a slave owner and one of the USA’s so-called founding fathers and who had fathered more than six children by black women he lasciviously impregnated, none the less in 1786 barefacedly passed a law which outlawed mixed marriages specifically between Blacks and whites. No change then in 2014 I see to this core element of the white racist mindset.

Therefore white men and their fellow white female sexual abusers had to do something concrete to salve their somewhat guilty consciences as far as their white wives, daughters and even white women generally were concerned; after all black females were biologically women even if they weren’t socially acknowledged as such and consequently the message had to be sent out that this sort of abuse was against women per se, not misogynistic in any way, simply something that was directly only at Blacks. So the most overtly cynical ruse was invented and implemented whereby these white women: wives, mothers, daughters, sisters, nieces etc, were publicly put on pedestals and constantly told that sex was an act of bestiality whose only proper role was the reproduction of children, and to have sexual yearnings solely for the purpose of pleasure was morally wrong in the eyes of God and all right thinking persons. It was also socially unpardonable, these white hypocrites exhorted them, for if encouraged it would put white females, who dissimilar to black women were created chaste by God, on the same bestial level as all black women are; and would they as white women and members of the humanity’s superior race want that to happen to them?

Of course these white women and even the hardcore white dyke abusers of black women didn’t want that to happen to them with all the attendant ostracism that that would entail especially if those heterosexually inclined white women were found to be consensually sexually consorting with black men. And so the white man and his white dyke equivalent’s ploy worked extremely well and still largely does in 2014; unquestionably so in many parts of Britain most notably in southern England. Meanwhile all black men knew full well that for them to have sexual notions about white women let alone consensually sleep with them and to be found out meant a brutal death for them often by lynching with several of their body parts, crucially their penises in very demonstrable acts of castration, severed from them while they were still alive and all this openly done in public amid the backdrop of crowds of cheering white folk and their families who had zealously gathered to watch this sadistic humiliation, torture and then the horrific live burning of an uppity nigger.

No white woman in her right mind living in the colonies would therefore willingly court or visit this opprobrium of knowingly consorting with a Blackman upon herself and only the very brave or foolhardy surreptitiously endeavoured to and occasionally succeeded in having ongoing and clandestine sexual relationships with black men knowing that in doing so if suspected or found out she could always claim as a survival mechanism on her part and in the eyes of her fellow whites that she was raped. In that regard too little has changed in 2014.

Sometimes these daredevil acts by white women were instigated by sheer curiosity on their part, and not uncommonly spurred on by the well known and accepted precept that if you arbitrarily ban something it usually generates a fevered interest all of its own, but equally too by the rank hypocrisy of their white men folk who while banning any romantic or sexual liaisons between white women and black men, with all the dire and attendant consequences for those black men involved if these proscriptions were deemed to have been flouted whether this was the case or not, were none the less quite delighted to keep the floodgates of their systemic and systematic sexual abuse and the ongoing and rather widespread rape of black women fully open for white Caucasian male traffic.

And it’s this kind of sick mindset with its pernicious, racial and eugenic attitudes that pervades all of the British police forces and their noticeably neo-Nazi inclined Police Federation, one of whose former chairmen publicly and unapologetically said on British TV that he thought it was perfectly alright to refer to black people as Niggers and Wogs. Doubtlessly this same federation also thinks it’s perfectly acceptable to murder or execute these same Niggers and Wogs in cold blood!

A cynical and invidious mindset that’s widespread across the UK where despite indisputable evidence to the contrary white men of all classes, educational ability or more frequently none whatsoever and backgrounds asininely continue to put their white Caucasian females up onto moralistic pedestals where they shouldn’t be and have no right to belong; deluding themselves in the process that these women are totally incapable of any wrongdoing and if it is subsequently proved otherwise then they must have done so involuntarily and categorically under pressure from some man who either pressurized the woman involved into doing what he wanted her to; had inveigled himself into her life by lyingly convincing her that he loved her when he didn’t, and having got her besotted with him callously exploited her genuine love for him; or else this apparently helpless white woman was totally under his spell, petrified of him and did whatever he demanded of her. Wheel out the puke bucket!

It’s a fucking sham that even British judges who one would normally have thought had more sense than that and therefore would see through this charade, which clearly goes to show you shouldn’t confuse book learning with commonsense, are quite willingly caught up in, and you only have to examine their sentencing policies towards white Caucasian females to see what I mean. A policy where exclusively these judges and magistrates, let’s not forget these judicial underlings, consistently hold out the olive branch of extenuating circumstances to these white women no matter what the hell they’ve done or how heinous and unmistakably instigative on these white women’s part their criminality is; and always resulting in the sickening situation where their sentences, comparable to that of a man guilty of the same offences, are habitually considerably lighter.

Consequently and fully aware of this British white women can embark on whatever crime spree they premeditatedly and callously choose to, from killing their own children and then publicly and coldheartedly advancing all sorts of ludicrous and farfetched so-called explanations about their children’s’ mysterious disappearance whether these occurred at home in the UK or abroad on holiday and get away with it. And amidst the ghoulish and unwarranted outpouring of bogus grief and sympathy for these callous and coldheartedly bitches by a British public obsessed and inured with staged-managed victim’s syndrome for people they never even met let alone know succeed as well in getting the British police inextricably though willingly caught up in the same messed up shit, running around like headless chicken after them and wasting valuable taxpayers money chasing phantom kidnappers or alleged killers when to anyone with a functioning brain in his or her head it’s quite obvious that they should be arresting these women for coldblooded and aggravated murder.

But they’re very reluctant to as logic plays no part in their deductions and so they don’t because these women and white and the myth of white Caucasian female sanctity duplicitously invented by white men and conveniently endorsed by white women during the Transatlantic Slave Trade and white European colonialism must live on; even into the 21st Century.

So going back to the white man allegedly killed in St. Lucia and the sexual inferences pertaining to him supposedly losing his life while defending his wife here’s my advice to Sky News and the rest of them that asininely want to prey on the purported predatory nature of black men sexually going after a white woman and her courageous white husband sacrificing his life to protect her from a fate allegedly worst than death; well I’ll bet you that it’s the racist fantasy of some white man in Sky’s news room whose woman, assuming he’s heterosexual that is and believe me that could be a quantum leap, is cuckolding him and he doesn’t even know about it that came up with this supposedly macho white crap. Dream on mate! I know differently from personal experiences and as my Barbadian article referred to earlier in this piece points out the facts clearly belie your assumptions; which frankly shows that you and those who think like you are manifestly talking through your white Caucasian asses!

About Me

I'm a highly intelligent, articulate and well-educated human being with an intuitive but enterprising sense of responsibility and a strong moral compass that instinctively demarcates what's right and wrong.
Trust, confidentiality and having the courage, regardless of what I do, to formulate and stand by my own personal convictions are key aspects of my life and, unsurprisingly, are also principal characteristics I attach great importance to and naturally expect from those who want to play a meaningful role in my life.
I don't suffer fools gladly, in fact not at all and most definitely haven’t got any interest in or time for egotists, time-wasters, attention seekers or the narcissistic.
Furthermore, I’m an adult and in my private and professional lives prefer to deal with genuine adults, so anyone who wants to act childishly and thinks they can have any kind of relationship with me, then you’re wrong!
And my advice to you in that regard is to go and enrol in a kindergarten as you'll possibly have better luck there.
My twitter feed if you're interested is: www.twitter.com/DerAkademiker.